These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Adapt Freighter and Jump Freighter

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dave stark
#581 - 2013-09-01 09:45:49 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
it's actually a sad moment when ziona is right.

She's not, In my last job I spent 4 years doing profit margin calculations all day.
Ziona is confusing Markup with Profit Margin.

Cost = 2
Sell = 4
Markup = 100%
Margin = 50%

Very different calculations.


protip: we're working out percentage change not profit margins.

((new value - old value) / old value) *100
Dave stark
#582 - 2013-09-01 09:48:14 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:

No need, simple to not allow capitals to be put into a hold or not allow them to be assembled in high, or not allow freighters with capital ships in hold to enter high sec or more fun to have customs fine or nuke freighters with banned caps inside... your protestation is just an excuse to not nerf your cash cow.


why should ccp **** up all the code they have to fix.... erm, nothing?
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#583 - 2013-09-01 09:53:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
it's actually a sad moment when ziona is right.

She's not, In my last job I spent 4 years doing profit margin calculations all day.
Ziona is confusing Markup with Profit Margin.

Cost = 2
Sell = 4
Markup = 100%
Margin = 50%

Very different calculations.

Maybe an indication why you don't have that job anymore.

Actually I don't have the job anymore because the company no longer trades in the UK.

I was using margins to demonstrate that a reduction in cost from 100,000,000 to 2,000,000 is not a 5000% reduction in cost. A percentage is expressed as a part of 100. The clue is in the word percent; per (a part) and cent (100).

http://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/financial/margin-calculator.php try using the figures of 2 as cost and 4 as sell and then tell me that my figure of a 50% margin is wrong. Try it with the cost as 2 and the sell as 100 as well. It returns a 98% profit, 4900% markup.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#584 - 2013-09-01 09:54:49 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

No need, simple to not allow capitals to be put into a hold or not allow them to be assembled in high, or not allow freighters with capital ships in hold to enter high sec or more fun to have customs fine or nuke freighters with banned caps inside... your protestation is just an excuse to not nerf your cash cow.


why should ccp **** up all the code they have to fix.... erm, nothing?


Cause if-statements are super hard?
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#585 - 2013-09-01 09:55:22 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

No need, simple to not allow capitals to be put into a hold or not allow them to be assembled in high, or not allow freighters with capital ships in hold to enter high sec or more fun to have customs fine or nuke freighters with banned caps inside... your protestation is just an excuse to not nerf your cash cow.


why should ccp **** up all the code they have to fix.... erm, nothing?

Yeah because they don't already have code like preventing assembled ships being put into holds, or customs checking, or gate locking (caps) or checks on assembling ships (T3's required modules are in order)... stop reaching out for desperate excuses

And before you say oh but they could transport packaged ships, they would only need to include packaged caps into that check as well.


CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Dave stark
#586 - 2013-09-01 09:56:02 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
it's actually a sad moment when ziona is right.

She's not, In my last job I spent 4 years doing profit margin calculations all day.
Ziona is confusing Markup with Profit Margin.

Cost = 2
Sell = 4
Markup = 100%
Margin = 50%

Very different calculations.

Maybe an indication why you don't have that job anymore.

Actually I don't have the job anymore because the company no longer trades in the UK.

I was using margins to demonstrate that a reduction in cost from 100,000,000 to 2,000,000 is not a 5000% reduction in cost. A percentage is expressed as a part of 100. The clue is in the word percent; per (a part) and cent (100).



((100 - 2) / 100) *100

(98 / 100)*100

98

98% reduction in cost.
Dave stark
#587 - 2013-09-01 09:56:42 UTC
S Byerley wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

No need, simple to not allow capitals to be put into a hold or not allow them to be assembled in high, or not allow freighters with capital ships in hold to enter high sec or more fun to have customs fine or nuke freighters with banned caps inside... your protestation is just an excuse to not nerf your cash cow.


why should ccp **** up all the code they have to fix.... erm, nothing?


Cause if-statements are super hard?


the difficulty of the coding is irrelevant; why waste the effort changing things that are perfectly fine.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#588 - 2013-09-01 09:57:39 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Same mechanic that stopped most freighters being ganked with the only reasonable force (battleships). Profitablity.


so, no game mechanic has ever stopped players dropping 2m isk ships on a freighter?


For every low slot added they would have to remove 12% base cargo ( I think thats what a t2 cargo extender gives you) otherwise people could ship capitals into high sec.

I dont want my freighter nerfed in an attempt to fix stupid people.

No need, simple to not allow capitals to be put into a hold or not allow them to be assembled in high, or not allow freighters with capital ships in hold to enter high sec or more fun to have customs fine or nuke freighters with banned caps inside... your protestation is just an excuse to not nerf your cash cow.


This cash cow being 30 to 40 ganked freighters a month out of the estimated half a million to a million freighter trips a month. Where is this problem you are trying to fix again?
Dave stark
#589 - 2013-09-01 09:57:42 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

No need, simple to not allow capitals to be put into a hold or not allow them to be assembled in high, or not allow freighters with capital ships in hold to enter high sec or more fun to have customs fine or nuke freighters with banned caps inside... your protestation is just an excuse to not nerf your cash cow.


why should ccp **** up all the code they have to fix.... erm, nothing?

Yeah because they don't already have code like preventing assembled ships being put into holds, or customs checking, or gate locking (caps) or checks on assembling ships (T3's required modules are in order)... stop reaching out for desperate excuses

And before you say oh but they could transport packaged ships, they would only need to include packaged caps into that check as well.




again, not questioning the difficulty of coding. i'm questioning why they should bother to change things that don't need changing.

as said pages ago; you don't want your freighter ganked don't fill it with shiny stuff. CCP physically can not code the game to prevent mongoloids being mongoloids. even CCP aren't that good.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#590 - 2013-09-01 09:58:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Dave Stark wrote:

((100 - 2) / 100) *100

(98 / 100)*100

98

98% reduction in cost.

Precisely the point I was arguing, you did it in a much more succinct fashion though. Zionas 5000% reduction in cost is bullshit.

Cheers Dave P

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Dave stark
#591 - 2013-09-01 10:00:25 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:

((100 - 2) / 100) *100

(98 / 100)*100

98

98% reduction in cost.

Precisely the point I was arguing, you did it in a much more succinct fashion though. Zionas 5000% reduction in cost is bullshit.



well yes, because anything past a 100% reduction in cost would result in a negative value.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#592 - 2013-09-01 10:04:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
I should have clarified that I was talking about margins in my examples, rather than markup. A lot of people can't tell the difference between the two. I shouldn't have used them as an example at all tbh, because of the confusion between the two. A 5000% markup is possible, a 5000% margin is not.

My bad Oops

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#593 - 2013-09-01 10:07:26 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:

((100 - 2) / 100) *100

(98 / 100)*100

98

98% reduction in cost.

Precisely the point I was arguing, you did it in a much more succinct fashion though. Zionas 5000% reduction in cost is bullshit.



well yes, because anything past a 100% reduction in cost would result in a negative value.


Back when freighters were added it was possible to insure a battleship and make a profit self destructing it. Add into that the fact that the concord response time was longer and you could gank a freighter for nothing or even at a profit even if nothing dropped. This whole aregument that its cheaper today it utter nonsense.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#594 - 2013-09-01 10:08:54 UTC
S Byerley wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

No need, simple to not allow capitals to be put into a hold or not allow them to be assembled in high, or not allow freighters with capital ships in hold to enter high sec or more fun to have customs fine or nuke freighters with banned caps inside... your protestation is just an excuse to not nerf your cash cow.


why should ccp **** up all the code they have to fix.... erm, nothing?


Cause if-statements are super hard?

If you're so sure about the ease of implementing such an IF statement into CCPs code, apply for a job and prove it.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Dave stark
#595 - 2013-09-01 10:11:25 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Back when freighters were added it was possible to insure a battleship and make a profit self destructing it. Add into that the fact that the concord response time was longer and you could gank a freighter for nothing or even at a profit even if nothing dropped. This whole aregument that its cheaper today it utter nonsense.


"but a catalyst is cheaper than a megathron guyz!"
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#596 - 2013-09-01 10:24:34 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Back when freighters were added it was possible to insure a battleship and make a profit self destructing it. Add into that the fact that the concord response time was longer and you could gank a freighter for nothing or even at a profit even if nothing dropped. This whole aregument that its cheaper today it utter nonsense.


"but a catalyst is cheaper than a megathron guyz!"


Dem ibis be free yo.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#597 - 2013-09-01 10:25:13 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:

"but a catalyst is cheaper than a megathron guyz!"

They'd still whine it was unfair if it required multiple Caps to kill a freighter...

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Dave stark
#598 - 2013-09-01 10:26:47 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:

"but a catalyst is cheaper than a megathron guyz!"

They'd still whine it was unfair if it required multiple Caps to kill a freighter...

"caps in high sec? NERF!"
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#599 - 2013-09-01 10:30:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Infinity Ziona
baltec1 wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:

((100 - 2) / 100) *100

(98 / 100)*100

98

98% reduction in cost.

Precisely the point I was arguing, you did it in a much more succinct fashion though. Zionas 5000% reduction in cost is bullshit.



well yes, because anything past a 100% reduction in cost would result in a negative value.


Back when freighters were added it was possible to insure a battleship and make a profit self destructing it. Add into that the fact that the concord response time was longer and you could gank a freighter for nothing or even at a profit even if nothing dropped. This whole aregument that its cheaper today it utter nonsense.


Zaxix wrote:
Roughly speaking, the point of profit for gankers comes around 2 billion. But that's not much profit. However, nothing will stop a thrill kill gank, because profit isn't the object. Most of the time, gankers are in it for the money and they want to make the most they can for their investment plus the lost sec status.

BTW: It only takes about 10 to 12 BS to pop a freighter. If you'd like to watch gankers in action, hang out in Niarja, Uedama, or the adjacent systems. If you fly regularly through those systems, I advise you do it ATK (at-the-keyboard) and not on autopilot, esp. if you go over the 1 billion isk cargo limit. If you go over 2 billion, you are taking a major risk. Freighter pilots looking to move that kind of expensive load should hire escorts, the serious, professional kind. Cause those pirates are very organized.

Link - Zaxix - Red Frog Freight

Now, you can do it for 2 milliion per pilot... pretty much free

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#600 - 2013-09-01 10:33:27 UTC
I'm going to butcher JFK here.

not JFK wrote:
Don't ask what you can do for yourself, ask CCP to do it for you.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack